Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment No comparison for specialised searching... (Score 1) 405

I have a script that scans my media and tries to determine what movie it is based on its name by simply searching for the name in a search engine, and taking either the first imdb reference on the results page, or the most frequently occuring one.

  The idea is for users not be be forced to rename their movies but let the script harness the algorithms on the search engine to work it out.

In my testing Google beats both Bing and Yahoo easily for accuracy of searching and has less false positives. However too many automated searches will quickly lock out the IP address on Google. So now I search both Bing and Yahoo at the same time. If they disgree on the imdb reference, only then I search Google, to cast the deciding vote. This gives very accurate results, but not much more than if I could use Google alone.

Yahoo is behind Bing for accuracy in my testing. I though Yahoo signed a deal with Microsoft and were going to start using Bing 'technology' at some point. When they do my current method will become redundant.

Comment Re:Answers (Score 1) 2

Thanks for observation re MITM - I just came across this too http://www.renesys.com/tech/presentations/pdf/blackhat-09.pdf

A lot of external vendors have to have signed certs because they have end users with browsers the get regular certificate updates.
I just though it a pain for servers that are sitting behind default deny firewalls and do not get certificate updates (esp to numerous JRE's installed on them).
But the above link with BGP hijacking, has made me think twice...

Submission + - Should servers trust servers 2

ydrol writes: I'm fed up with integrations breaking when endpoints change their SSL certificates. I understand end users needing the "trust" aspect of SSL, but I see most of the time integrations between servers in the enterprise estate just care about encryption and trust is an annoyance.
(Obviously in some Sectors this might be unthinkable to ignore SSL "trust" in server to server communication, but in many its not important, is it?)

In the enterprise trust often comes through firewall default deny rules , and only allowing specific IP addresses.
And a lot of man-hours are wasted when some cloud service decides to suddenly change their root certificate supplier.

So is it OK for servers (not users) to implicitly trust servers when it comes to SSL?

Also MITM attacks are kinda hard these days between fixed IP addresses aren't they?

Comment Re:I might just be a luddite, but (Score 1) 348

> That might be true when entering a well lit area, but upon leaving it, you will see much less until your eyes adapt.

Apparently this is the reason passenger aircraft dim the lights at night during take-off and landing. Should their be an emergency that causes loss of lighting they want to make sure people can more quickly acclimatise to the darkness,

Comment Re:You gotta be kidding me?! (Score 1) 459

Good NTFS support on Linux has only been around for the last 5 years or so. and no thanks to Microsoft of course. Before that it was fairly risky to write to NTFS partitions from linux. In the media-streamer world, there is a lot of demand from users to manage their NTFS based portable storage from embedded Linux based streamers. Despite commercial 3rd party NTFS drivers, it still seems a bit risky to me.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Anetworkedmediatank.com+ntfs

Comment Re:"as opposed with their entire list of contacts" (Score 1) 163

One thing I want is more control over who see's which photos I'm tagged in. (not my own photos).
I want to set visibility based on either the tagger or the owner of the photograph.

At the moment you set inclusion and exclude groups but it applies to ALL photos you are tagged in.

For example , I may go out with a rowdy bunch, and dont mind them seeing my less flattering moments, but I also want family to see more sedate photos I'm tagged in.

Facebook has taken all the fun out of getting irresponsibly drunk.

Comment Re:Best Buy tried to sell me an HDMI cable... (Score 1) 664

The HDMI cables, are just like usb cables , camera filters or any other accessory to high ticket price items.

Retail shops aggressively discounts the TV, Camera, BluRay player, and then makes their money back on accessories.
Never buy accessories in these types of establishments unless you need it now or next working day.

Shoppers will agonize over saving £20-30 on a £500 TV, then blow those savings on accessories, because the lower price of accessories, does not require so much emotional investment.

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Working...